Is fish keeping ethical?

[biophilia]

How do we know fish don't think?
They know where to get food, they remember their territory boundaries, they remember the pecking order, they bicker and fight with each other, they don't cope with change very well, some are brave, some are timid, some love to watch your every move, they appear to have personalities, some like my purple tang are just jerks... Dont get me wrong I don't think they ponder the meaning of life, just not sure we can definitively say everything they do is just instinct. One thing I'm certain about is they do get scared and do suffer

On that note, is the cognitive capacity of a fish what should determine what ethical considerations we owe them? If reduced capacity to “think” is the marker used, do we owe less ethical consideration to people who have cognitive impairments or who are in persistent vegetative states? It would also almost certainly mean we owe more ethical consideration to pigs and crows than we do to dogs, for example.

 

[biophilia]

You can not debate people on ethics or morals concerning keeping aquarium life if they believe animals are possessions, no different than their tv or a piece of art on their wall.

Yes! This is super important and a big part of what fuels the ecological crisis at large IMO. A worldview that sees the complex web of life as a collection of objects rather than a “communion of subjects” leads to the wrong kind of questions being asked about the world, our place in it, and the kinds of consideration we owe the rest of life around us.

 

[OriginalUserName]

On that note, is the cognitive capacity of a fish what should determine what ethical considerations we owe them? If reduced capacity to “think” is the marker used, do we owe less ethical consideration to people who have cognitive impairments or who are in persistent vegetative states? It would also almost certainly mean we owe more ethical consideration to pigs and crows than we do to dogs, for example.

What other metric could we use? If intelligence is out the window then even keeping a sponge or coral would be inhumane.

 

[NY_Caveman]

Here is an ethics question for everyone.

An inexperienced reefer buys 6 random Tangs for a 75 gallon display. No research, minimal acclimation and no quarantine. Within a week all Tangs perish.

Is this person ethical?

Ignorance is bliss, but is it unethical?

I know how most people in this forum would feel, but how about your uncle? Your average co-worker? The local gas station attendant? My guess is most people would not think too much about some lost fish. Perhaps the majority of people. If anything the money lost would affect them more than the fish loss. Does the hobbyist, the minority, have the right to determine what is ethical for the majority?

And who are we to say? Fresh and saltwater fish die every day due to newcomers to the hobby and the businesses who sell to them. To stop this we would have to end the hobby itself and all tear down our tanks. Is it ethical to responsibly support a hobby whose business thrives on the quick turnover of livestock? But we stay in the hobby and call some businesses and hobbyists unethical.

As this thread progresses, and I consider other experiences in my life, I am beginning to think that ethics is a mirage used to shame others.

 

[OriginalUserName]

Here is an ethics question for everyone.

An inexperienced reefer buys 6 random Tangs for a 75 gallon display. No research, minimal acclimation and no quarantine. Within a week all Tangs perish.

Is this person ethical?

Ignorance is bliss, but is it unethical?

I know how most people in this forum would feel, but how about your uncle? Your average co-worker? The local gas station attendant? My guess is most people would not think too much about some lost fish. Perhaps the majority of people. If anything the money lost would affect them more than the fish loss. Does the hobbyist, the minority, have the right to determine what is ethical for the majority?

And who are we to say? Fresh and saltwater fish die every day due to newcomers to the hobby and the businesses who sell to them. To stop this we would have to end the hobby itself and all tear down our tanks. Is it ethical to responsibly support a hobby whose business thrives on the quick turnover of livestock? But we stay in the hobby and call some businesses and hobbyists unethical.

As this thread progresses, and I consider other experiences in my life, I am beginning to think that ethics is a mirage used to shame others.

Why are yellow tangs more worthy of care than say a sardine? Millions of fish are harvested every day for consumption, fertilizer, animal feed etc. As pet owners we tend to have blinders on. People will treat their dogs like family, but eat pork. We get upset when somebody kills a tang because of neglect and then order a tuna roll.

Edit, I'm totally guilty of this myself.

 

[NY_Caveman]

Why are yellow tangs more worthy of care than say a sardine? Millions of fish are harvested every day for consumption, fertilizer, animal feed etc. As pet owners we tend to have blinders on. People will treat their dogs like family, but eat pork. We get upset when somebody kills a tang because of neglect and then order a tuna roll.

My favorite food label of all time is “dolphin safe tuna!”

Tuna’s like, “Dude!”

And do not tell me dolphins are mammals unless you personally are qualified to say that is where the line should be drawn.

 

[NY_Caveman]

You can not debate people on ethics or morals concerning keeping aquarium life if they believe animals are possessions, no different than their tv or a piece of art on their wall.

"The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated."
― Mahatma Gandhi

Does anyone else believe that society is going down the toilet bowl. I'll stick to the atrocities I've witnessed in the aquarium trade, but it's across the board at zoos, shelters, and every aspect of every pet industry. Humans and greed. Zoos breed and keep the babies because they are a crowd favorite, and get rid of the older harder to care for individuals, have you ever heard of a canned hunt; I have and i have saved discarded zoo animals from that fate. Some of your larger popular charities to prevent the cruelty of animals are nothing more than a 2nd hand pet store masquerading as a charity. I would get an emergency call to groom rescues from the same disgusting puppy mills week after week, with no attempt to control or shut down their disgusting operations. I'm having a hard time seeing this changing any time soon.

I do not think society is going down the toilet bowl. I just think in this “Information Age” we are exposed to more things that have been happening for a long time. To fuel the fire, all forms of news media highlight the most malevolent and shocking stories.

 

[OriginalUserName]

My favorite food label of all time is “dolphin safe tuna!”

Tuna’s like, “Dude!”

And do not tell me dolphins are mammals unless you personally are qualified to say that is where the line should be drawn.

I can't remember where I read it, but somebody really summed that issue up in a way that made sense to me. His idea was that throughout our history we have slowly expanded our circle of "us" or "valuable life". Early on, anybody outside of our family/tribe was not worth anything. Then cities, nations... Eventually we included other races and all of humanity. Many of us are pretty close to that when it comes to higher primates like Gorillas and Chimps, Dolphins aren't far behind. Once we can easily grow meat in a lab we won't need to balance our desire to eat tasty tasty meat with killing animals, we just won't see a need. Sooner or later we will all be vegans.

If I can eat a nice rib eye steak AND not kill a cow, that's gravy.

 

[NY_Caveman]

I can't remember where I read it, but somebody really summed that issue up in a way that made sense to me. His idea was that throughout our history we have slowly expanded our circle of "us" or "valuable life". Early on, anybody outside of our family/tribe was not worth anything. Then cities, nations... Eventually we included other races and all of humanity. Many of us are pretty close to that when it comes to higher primates like Gorillas and Chimps, Dolphins aren't far behind. Once we can easily grow meat in a lab we won't need to balance our desire to eat tasty tasty meat with killing animals, we just won't see a need. Sooner or later we will all be vegans.

If I can eat a nice rib eye steak AND not kill a cow, that's gravy.

Your tribe, cities, nations point has helped me to realize that ethics is no different than any other philosophical opinion. Be it religion, politics, ethics, etc., you form your own personal beliefs, or hopefully, your own ideas which can evolve without rigidity. I firmly feel that it is not my place to impose my opinion on any of those subjects upon other people. The most dangerous people are those who relentlessly try to project their religious, political and ethical views upon others. I do not mean debate or discussion, but those who want to force their opinions into societal norms. I would suggest they need to do this to reaffirm the rigid beliefs they are dedicated too.

As far as the Tangs I mentioned in the example earlier, I do not like it, I would not do it, but I cannot tell that reefer he was unethical.

 

[biophilia]

Your tribe, cities, nations point has helped me to realize that ethics is no different than any other philosophical opinion. Be it religion, politics, ethics, etc., you form your own personal beliefs, or hopefully, your own ideas which can evolve without rigidity. I firmly feel that it is not my place to impose my opinion on any of those subjects upon other people. The most dangerous people are those who relentlessly try to project their religious, political and ethical views upon others. I do not mean debate or discussion, but those who want to force their opinions into societal norms. I would suggest they need to do this to reaffirm the rigid beliefs they are dedicated too.

Every dogmatic tradition or school of thought has its true believers. I think that often times they are people who have simply lost faith in themselves and are looking for an external source or idea to give themselves meaning and purpose. From my own experience, I find it can be really hard not to slip into the comfort of rigid ideas about the world. I appreciate philosophy and ethics as a means to ponder the interesting ideas and endless complexities of what it means to be a human being in a sometimes overwhelming world, but also find that I am turned off by philosophers or ethicists who act as if they have found the magic answer or one universal truth. Maybe it's just echoes of our species' tribal past following us stubbornly into the 21st century.

 

[biophilia]

What other metric could we use? If intelligence is out the window then even keeping a sponge or coral would be inhumane.

Bentham/Singer/etc have suggested "the capacity to suffer" as an appropriate metric.

I'm not sure about that distinction, though. What about the case of, say, spear-fishing invasive lionfish in the Florida keys? If capacity to suffer is the metric and lionfish have a developed central nervous system and are thus capable of experiencing some level of pain and suffering, killing them would not be ethically permissible. That being said, not killing them means the trophic cascade they are currently causing in the Keys will continue -- complete with an infinitely larger pool of suffering by many other endemic species found there. Who knows...

 

[Thales]

In today's society do we even treat each other ethically? Look at the way we treat one another, I personally care for my dogs and fish more than I do most people.

That seems awful.

 

[Thales]

You can not debate people on ethics or morals concerning keeping aquarium life if they believe animals are possessions, no different than their tv or a piece of art on their wall.

Don't debate anyone, have a conversation instead where everyone listens to each other. Debates are games to be won, and the debate mindset is about winning more than about sharing information, and leads to no one really thinking about anything. If you have a conversation with someone, maybe they will see your point of view.

 

[Thales]

Here is an ethics question for everyone.

An inexperienced reefer buys 6 random Tangs for a 75 gallon display. No research, minimal acclimation and no quarantine. Within a week all Tangs perish.

Is this person ethical?

Ignorance is bliss, but is it unethical?

I know how most people in this forum would feel, but how about your uncle? Your average co-worker? The local gas station attendant? My guess is most people would not think too much about some lost fish. Perhaps the majority of people. If anything the money lost would affect them more than the fish loss. Does the hobbyist, the minority, have the right to determine what is ethical for the majority?

And who are we to say?

Who are we not to say? If we have more experience in the area, perhaps we are the only people to say.

Ethics are not laws, they are not decided and handed down. They are ever evolving though thought and conversation.

Fresh and saltwater fish die every day due to newcomers to the hobby and the businesses who sell to them. To stop this we would have to end the hobby itself and all tear down our tanks.

I disagree. There are many ways to lessen this issue ethically that aren't shutting down the hobby.

Is it ethical to responsibly support a hobby whose business thrives on the quick turnover of livestock? But we stay in the hobby and call some businesses and hobbyists unethical.

Maybe. Perhaps it is ethical to work to make the hobby more ethical.

As this thread progresses, and I consider other experiences in my life, I am beginning to think that ethics is a mirage used to shame others.

They are certainly sadly used this way, but that is a mistake of the person doing it, not an issue with ethics or the discussion of ethics.

 

[curiouser]

My favorite quote.

"Think for a second how dumb the aver person is. Then remember that half of all people are dumber than that." Paraphrased from Carlin

Carlin is on my list of great American philosophers.